Thurman#1

He does play well in the playoffs. But the winner of this award was always likely to be a guy still playing, in other words a guy who has not yet used up all his chances to get to a Super Bowl. Also worth pointing out that as well as Josh played in those games, Mahomes outplayed him in most of them. Greeny points out that Allen only has one INT against KC in the playoff losses. Mahomes has zero in the same games. In any case, Peyton made the SB his first time in his 9th year. Fouts never played in the SB. Tarkenton didn't make the Super Bowl, or I believe the playoffs, till like his 12th or 13th year. Allen's got plenty of time and is on a team that has given him chances nearly every year. He'll make it more than once, says I, and win a minimum of one, probably more. You're right, they don't have a competent coach. McDermott is far far better than that. But yeah, overreacting and dumb hot takes are fun, so go do your thing.

This is it. We had no QB then, and we do now And Buddy knew it. But they had to get a QB in a year where there just wasn't a good QB option in the draft. The best QB in 2013 was clearly Geno Smith, but he wasn't any good until - what? - eight years later? Ideally they should have done what McDermott did in his first year, traded way back to get good draft capital for trade-ups the next year. But even the next year who was the best QB in the draft? Either Derek Carr or Teddy Bridgewater. If handled better, would either of these guys have had better careers than they have? Maybe. That two-year stretch is one of the worst periods to draft a QB in NFL history.

Marshawn has made it clear that he blames a group of police here for targeting him. That had to do with that cop's wife saying that Marshawn had stolen a $20 from her. He wanted out, badly, and not because of the team situation.

Interesting point. Don't know if this has been noticed yet, but if it has I haven't seen it. Both Spotrac and OvertheCap have the contract total at $46M, not $48M Also, OvertheCap has the FULLY GUARANTEED money at $15.28M. (Ah, Spotrac agrees.) I'm sure the rest is guaranteed against injury, but this looks like the contract numbers originally released had been plumped up a bit, probably by the agents. Surprise, surprise!! This legitimately is a risk they're taking here. IMO if Cook stays healthy it'll look like a good risk. If he gets injured, particularly in the next three years, it will be a contract that bites the Bills. Cook is young, he'll turn 26 late in September, so this contract goes through his age 30 season. They're likely to keep limiting his snaps, or so I believe anyway. There's a decent chance he stays healthy through his age 26, 27 and 28 seasons. Only a part of that next season four years from now, will be guaranteed, and we don't yet know how much. But he could probably be cut (if it's for performance or financial reasons, not for injury) without any cap problems, before the the third year of the extension, 2028, if he starts regressing or has problems with injuries cropping up.

It's all one window, a window that is open from 2020 till Josh gets too old. You say, "NFL windows are short," and that's nonsense. Some NFL windows last a year. Some are short. Some are a bit longer and some are damn long. The Pats window lasted like 16 or 17 years. The Chiefs six years so far. Ours has a long way to go.

Yeah, weird that people would assume that a line with 5 new guys out of probably 10 guys who will see a lot of time would be a bit diff ... oh, wait, it's not silly at all. I've been watching for 50+ years as well. One thing that I learned is that some years things don't change much from the year before, and some years things look totally different. And with so many new guys this year is likely to be the latter. So many inflection points! I mean, if Bosa stays healthy, my guess is this group looks an awful lot better. It's not a sure thing, but it's likely. But he could easily be injured, his history shows that. Will he, with them giving him much fewer snaps? No way to know, and the difference, either way, will probably be stark. They might be much the same. Or not. No way to know beyond watching the games as they happen. Plenty of guesswork is possible, either way, but at this point it's pure blue-sky stuff.

Not clear at all, not after one preseason game. Not clear at all how guys like Bosa, Hoecht, Sanders, Jackson and Walker will play in this D, nor how others will look playing next to those guys. It didn't look like that's what you were implying, but if it is, then fair enough. But it's just way way way too early to make any more than uneducated guesses as to whether we'll get much pressure and if we do, how. We'll probably have to wait till after week 8 when we get our first look at how the line looks with Hoecht in the mix before we start to get a good idea, though hopefully by that time the rookies will start to have found their feet and started making some kind of impact. So many inflection points! I mean, if Bosa stays healthy, my guess is this group looks an awful lot better. It's not a sure thing, but it's likely. But he could easily be injured, his history shows that. Will he, with them giving him much fewer snaps? No way to know, and the difference, either way, will probably be stark.

And so, from a camera's eye view, you are an insider on this? You know how serious this was? Please. You have no idea. Nor do I, but that's the point. None of us have any idea. Not even the Bills, the doctors and Benford know with much detail, but your layman's observations of long-distance camera footage, not knowing what he was thinking or whether he was trying to move means pretty much nothing. Worth $12M AAV, with those contract terms, yes. Don't know what you're laughing about. Most on here opposing re-signing him weren't doing it because they didn't want him, they were against it at the $15M Cook was demanding, and which the Bills did not pay. Heh heh. I like this.

I don't know. I think your narrative here is just as overblown. Nobody argues with the fact that he's more explosive than Davis and Johnson. And yeah, people act like he was just a cog in a rotation. That's what he was. The most important cog, but just a cog. Davis got 50% of Cook's yards from scrimmage on 54% of Cook's snaps. And how many more hits on Josh did Ray and Ty prevent than did Cook? I'm also glad they're limiting his snaps. I agree with you there 100%, that it really raises the chances that his productivity lasts longer and that he avoids injury. We haven't so far seen that he's improved his pass blocking in camp this year, that I've heard anyway. So we use him for situations, the way they did last year, 1st and 2nd downs, and we bench him for others, 3rd downs and short-yardage must-have smash-mouth situations. But we will be more productive with him on the field in those Cook situations. We're a better team with him. The question is (always, for every player) whether the extra money we spend is worth the value of the next-best alternative on how to spend that money, the opportunity cost. My guess is that at $12M AAV the answer is yes, and that at $15M the answer would have been no. But I'd love it if he out-produces my expectations.

Yes, Coleman is better than Kristian Wilkerson and Tyrell Shavers. And yes, when healthy Kincaid has a chance to be a playmaker. Still has a lot to prove, of course. But to put it in perspective, Kincaid was 10th in receiving yards and 7th in receptions among TEs in 2023. As a rookie. That's better than Cook ranks in running yards or yards from scrimmage among RBs as a third-year man. Kincaid is a weapon when healthy and when on the same page as Josh. Something weird happened to their chemistry last year. Was it that he wasn't quite as fast or that he couldn't cut as sharply so Josh missed him because of that? I don't think there's a clear answer, but that could easily be a part of the problem. If they get back in sync, he's likely to be someone both Josh and opposing teams look for on big downs. And is it possible to win Super Bowls without a lot of playmakers? Ask the 2023 Chiefs. Yeah, it is. You pretty much have to have a terrific QB to do it. But we do. Heh heh.

Guess we'll see, but I think he's going to be TE1, assuming he's healthy. Last year he was far from healthy.

That was certainly a legitimate opinion at the time. Hell, it was my guess at the time that he wouldn't do well there. But it could easily have gone the other way.

Yes, with hindsight we know that. It wasn't a sure thing either way at the time. Price was a starting WR as well. Just not one who lived up to his contract. Cook is a starting RB on probably 24 teams around the league. That doesn't mean he'll be a success everywhere. For instance, one possible outcome would be that he signs with a team that plays him on 75% of snaps and his body can't hold up and he breaks down. You can't tell what'll happen. IMO the Bills are handling him right by limiting his snaps. Could be he could stand up to 75%. But there's no way to know. Could be he has one and a half more years of good production and then regresses. Just no way to know for sure.

Nah, that's hindsight. Sure, after it went down it was clear that Peerless wasn't a WR1. Not so before, though. Could've gone either way. My guess is also that Cook will do well elsewhere, but not as well as he is doing here with this OL and situation. Cook is running into light boxes at an extremely high rate as teams struggle to deal with Josh Allen. He won't have that advantage elsewhere.

Nonsense. It's not expected to happen. It's expected to happen sometimes. Disagreements on contract provisions and on how well a player is fulfilling his duties are constant and common in this league. And there's no reason whatsoever to think that the Bills have not given him an offer that's very fair for his production and the fact that he's signed for another year. Again, the other three-year players who signed contracts this year with the Bills understood that signing them early is a major concession by the Bills and should be treated as such. They signed contracts that guarantee them lives of ease for them and their families with just reasonable handling of their money. And yet gave the Bills a bit of a break on the terms. Cook isn't willing to do that. Just the opposite, he wants the Bills to sign a contract that's worth more than his production. After four years, that's more reasonable. After three ... well, it likely leads to the outcome we're seeing now. Cook will have to deal with the consequences, including unpleasant financial results if he suffers an injury during the season.

They've almost certainly offered to pay Cook what he's worth. What they're not willing to do is OVERpay. And yes, the Bills are focused on giving him a run game. Within the team framework, anyway. That's far from the only thing they're focused on, but it is something they think is important. And it is what they're doing here. You don't like the WAY they're doing that. But that's what they're doing. Not overpaying is a part of that plan. Again, a part you don't like. But part of the plan.

Teams don't follow them anymore than a guy holding out or holding in does. The right to cut isn't in the contract. It's in the collective bargaining agreement. And the right to hold out or hold in, as long as you accept the penalties you incur, is also in the CBA. Teams feel free to cut players before the end of their contracts. It's acceptable procedure. Players should feel free to hold in. It's within the agreement the owners signed. That's an interesting thought. Worth considering. But Cook will be back in the fold soon enough. He doesn't want to miss game checks. Still might be worth Beane doing something outside the box like that.

"Benford is a concussion away from missing a season," you say? And it's me who makes "unequivocal determinations"? You have no idea. Nor do I. Nor does anyone, including his doctors. Pretending you know that is just sad. Even assuming it's true, it's no less true that Cook is also one injury away from missing a season. So is every player on the field. Oh, and no, I don't blame Cook a bit for wanting his money. But I do hold him responsible for using tactics that I don't think will get him what he wants. There are many ways to go about trying to get paid. He's chosen this one. He'll have to take the consequences. And I would blame Beane (as should all of us) for overpaying, or for signing a bad contract. Oh, and real quick, go find a post anywhere where I've got my "chest pumped up, boasting about," absolutely anything. Bring us a link where I did that. I don't know who you're thinking of, but it ain't me. Sometimes things turn out exactly the way I said they will. Plenty of other times they don't. Either way I'm not due a lot of credit, as I'm generally only trying to argue for common sense. And yeah, Cook did see Benford, Bernard and Rousseau get a second contract - after their third year. EVERY ONE OF THEM took a team-friendly contract. Standard practice when signing after your third year. Cook isn't doing that. Maybe he could have learned from Benford, Bernard and Rousseau. They are all signed before their fourth year, greatly mitigating the financial consequences of an injury in their fourth year. Again, I like Cook as a player. A lot. I just don't want to overpay for him. Or anyone, really.

Benford is not better than Cook at his position? Um, yeah, sure, whatever you say, dude. I mean, you're dead wrong of course, Benford is a top five guy at CB and there are twice as many starting CBs as there are RBs. He's absolutely better than Cook at his position, and CB is absolutely a more important position than RB. As for Kyren Williams, he has put up 4.5 YPC, while Cook has put up 4.9. Cook is better, but not that much. And while part of that is because Cook is more explosive, another large part of it is that the Bills virtually never use Cook as a short-yardage hammer on the plays where making one or two yards I success, and Kyren Williams is the Rams smash-mouth guy. Cook isn't big enough or powerful enough for the role. And Kyren is. The Bills know they've got to take Cook off the field in those situations. The Rams keep Williams out there and run him up the gut while the D knows what's almost certainly coming, and Williams gets the first down a lot more than he doesn't. That will lower your YPC while still making you a very valuable player. And no, Cook isn't clearly the second-best player on this team. Benford, Milano, Taron Johnson are better for a start. Milano and Taron have been All-Pros, very recently. Dawkins, Spencer Brown are probables. It all goes up and down, of course, but pretending it's clear that he's #2 is ridiculous. Cook's very good in many aspects, most specially his explosiveness. But he's got drawbacks as well, pass blocking, the inability to be used as a power back and that he's good but not great as a pass catcher, not to mention that he's a smaller guy who may well be best used less than genuine bell cow backs. I think this is great stuff. And I want Cook too. But while I would pay him, I wouldn't overpay him, and certainly I wouldn't after three, not four years.

No, high level running backs with high level offensive lines is not the correct answer. Wide receivers are the correct answer. And yeah, I did indeed get you, even if you're desperate enough to use sarcasm unsuccessfully in your argument. Do the Eagles think that running back is the least important skill position? Well, they pay Sequin around $20M AAV. That's a lot of simoleons. But not as many as they pay AJ Brown. Around $32M AAV if I remember correctly. So yeah, the Eagles do think WR is more important than RB. The whole league does. Kid yourself that a completely imaginary, theoretical email that you're apparently writing yourself in your own mind would be more definitive if you want. It's weak sauce, but if that's the way you want to go, that's your choice. But in a capitalist society, and a part of it with a salary cap, it's not difficult to tell what teams value. They pay more for what they value more. Money is the yardstick. That's why it's not surprising that James Cook wants more of it. Or that AJ Brown gets more of it. Oh, and I do agree with you that RBs move the needle. It's just that WRs move it more.

That "But running back is the least important skill position," can't be supported in any way? That's nonsense. It's supported in the most telling way. How much are WRs paid? How much are RBs paid? Wanna know how the NFL values positions? It's not difficult to figure. Check the salaries. It's not a mistake that QBs make the most and long snappers the least. Even TEs are paid more than RBs, though not by that much. Eleven TEs make $12M or over. Fifteen make $10M or over. Do the Eagles think that running back is the least important skill position? Well, they pay Sequin around $20M AAV. That's a lot of simoleons. But not as many as they pay AJ Brown. Around $32M if I remember correctly. So yeah, the Eagles do think WR is more important than RB. The whole league does.

This isn't on Beane. It just isn't. Beane is not the one holding in. Cook is. Beane has made an offer he thinks is reasonable. Beane knows that Cook doesn't want to miss game checks. He's handling this just right. Yes, Cook is a weapon, and yes the team is better with him than without him. But they're still really really good without him. He missed the Jets game and they ran just fine without him. And the Jets were a very good D last year. On the other hand, in the two games Shakir missed, we looked bad on offense. Quite bad. But they're almost certainly not going to be without him, not until next year anyway. If Beane's offer is less than we think, if he only offered $8 or $9M, then yeah, this is on Beane. But unwillingness to be held hostage is part of being a good businessman and a good GM. And I don't think too many of us think the Bills offer was that low. If it really was, Cook would be well-served by having his agent go public with it. But my guess is the offer was in the Kyren Williams area and Cook would get no sympathy if he did go public.

Jerry Hughes, I'd argue. They expected him to fall off a cliff. He didn't. Tyrel Dodson, maybe. His first year away was really good. Quinton Jefferson, probably. Can't think of anyone else, or anyone who hasn't been mentioned.

It's weird that nobody has reported on how he looks since camp started, isn't it? Does he look bigger? The same? Have they asked him if he's stronger, if he's lifting more? He's playing really well so far, and that's the important thing. We know he was there a ton in the offseason putting in the work and getting stronger, as Beane has reported on that. But I am a bit curious about how he looks and nobody has asked, I guess.

That's a grammar mistake. The word you want here is "IF," not "WHEN." And if he does sign here for, say $13M next offseason, that would make a ton more sense than it would have made this offseason. A year from now they'll have had the benefit of having him for this year at his current salary, he'll be a four-year vet and the cap will be higher. All of those could tend to raise the price next off-season. Whereas when a team signs a guy after three seasons, it is of great benefit to the player who gets to play the fourth year with much less worry about injury and how that might affect him. The other third-year guys who the Bills signed this offseason all understood this and in return for the really significant bargaining chip of signing them early gave the Bills a team-friendly deal. Cook did not even think of doing that. Which is his right, but it does have consequences. Look at Benford. He's now the 19th highest paid CB by AAV. And he's a ton better than the 19th best CB. He's a better player than Cook, at a more important position. And he gave us a team-friendly deal. Again, Cook did not do that. Nobody should be surprised that we didn't give Cook $15M or anywhere near it ... AFTER HIS THIRD YEAR!!!!!!!!!!!